Senator Chuck Grassley issued the following comment about his vote against the year-end tax plan.
“It’d be one thing to raise taxes to reduce the deficit, but that’s not what this deal does. It’s a fiscal farce to raise taxes and hurt economic growth only to fuel more government spending with record deficits and debt. People at the grass roots want Washington to spend less, not more. Failure to deal with spending lets them down. Spending restraint ought to be more than a wishful new year’s resolution with no way to be certain it’s kept.
“I support preventing tax increases on Americans by extending the tax cuts I authored in the Senate in the last decade. After the election, Republican leaders in Congress offered revenue increases as part of a balanced deal that would also take on Washington’s spending problem. Instead, the President focused on raising taxes and missed a significant opportunity to tackle spending. Washington has a spending problem, not a taxing problem, and this deal doesn’t do anything about the spending problem.
In the end, Congress will avoid the Fiscal Cliff, and choose Obama's Fecal Cliff instead! (http://www.conservativecave.com/Smileys/default/argh.gif)
Marco Rubio 2016!
With the "American Taxpayer Relief Act" we see that DoubleThink is alive and well in America: a tax hike on small-business people at $400,000 and KEEPING RATES THE SAME are now being called - and apparently with no irony - "Taxpayer Relief" !!!
Welcome to the new Greece.
What percentage of small business owners make $400,000 or more?
...An owner of a flow-through entity may show a high taxable income, but not have much actual cash to show for it in any one year. I had an S Corp owner say to me he was “rich on paper, but poor on cash flow.â€...
...if you own a small business, you are often paying the equivalent of double the amount of employment taxes as what your non-owner employees are paying. This is particularly hard on partnerships and most LLC members who participate in management, ...
...Fringe Benefits: The 2% Rule – Without getting into the details, most owners of small businesses are actually subject to reverse discrimination when it comes to taxation of fringe benefits....
Small business owners may show a lot of income for tax purposes, but they don’t always have that income to spend.[/quote]
What percentage of small business owners make $400,000 or more?
Actually, a fairly decent percentage--but that's not to say they're making $400K in PROFIT. Something to keep in mind when unemployment starts taking off again.
What percentage of small business owners make $400,000 or more?
The Social Security portion of the tax is 12.4% up to $102,000 (in 2008) and the Medicare portion is 2.9%. Employees pay half of this tax and their employers pay the other half. Self-employed individuals pay the entire amount.
http://biztaxlaw.about.com/od/businesstaxes/a/selfemploytax.htm
What percentage?
While the income of the average S corp was less than seven percent of its sales, there was wide variation across major industry sectors on this measure. Income only equaled about two percent of sales for sub chapter S corporations in retail, but almost 55 percent in management of companies, and almost 29 percent in mining. Similarly, wide industry differences can be seen in the average income of these businesses, ranging from only a little more than $28,000 in other services to $692,000 in management of companies. In fact, in four industry sectors – utilities, manufacturing, mining and management of companies – the average Sub Chapter S Corporation is making its owner rich by President Obama’s standards, generating more than $250,000 in income in 2007.
What percentage?
What percentage?
I am not sure and there is no true statistic out there just a bunch of educated guesses.
I do know, I have worked for many.
One a small computer repair shop in the area. We had 5 employees, we grossed about 1.3 million in sales/service, our net was about 250k and with that he had to pay 5 employees and the bills. I was pretty much his right hand man and even though he had a CPA do all his taxes and such, he paid nearly 48% in taxes.
Now we really wanted to expand, we had a good game plan, good clients, good products, great store front. Our dream was to open a second location. But we just couldn't, we needed to hire a few more people because we were stretched thin with our current contract clients. With maybe 2 new employees we could get a little extra profit and then migrate to a new store. Anyway... long story short. If he were taxes say 5-8% less he could have afforded to hire some more people and grow, thus hiring more people creating more jobs, etc etc etc
a tax hike on small-business people at $400,000This is going to kill the family farm.
Bottom line, small business owners are just that--SMALL, but are being hit like they're major corporations, but without the benefit of sheltering their revenue or profits like the big boys do (like, say, GE, Google, Berkshire Hathaway, etc...)
President Obama’s re-election ... marks the massive endorsement of an expanding crony capitalism that ultimately could reshape the already troubled American economic system beyond recognition.
But just one month later, the Obama administration has begun handing out exemptions from the rules, starting with a power plant project stocked with technology from the company whose boss now leads the president’s own Council on Jobs and Competitiveness — Jeffrey Immelt’s GE. Greenwire reports: The Obama administration will spare a stalled power plant project in California from the newest federal limits on greenhouse gases and conventional air pollution, U.S. EPA says in a new court filing that marks a policy shift in the face of industry groups and Republicans accusing the agency of holding up construction of large industrial facilities.
The problem is that net income is not what you think it is. Those with a net income of $400,000 will receive a tax increase. Do we agree on that?
Now look at the definition of "net income".
“Net income†is the phrase commonly used to refer to a company’s “profit.†It represents how much money the company has left over, if any, after it’s paid the costs of doing business — payroll, raw materials, taxes, interest on loans, etc." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7477449/ns/business-answer_desk/t/whats-difference-between-revenue-income/
Therefore, your little business did not reach $400,000 or even $250,000 in net income. If you type how much you paid your employees I will teach you how to figure out what your net income was.
It's painfully apparent then you haven't the first friggin clue how an S-corp or LLC works then.Well, seeing that he's quoting the propaganda arm of the democrat party (msnbc). I doubt he can discuss anything beyond the talking points he's given.
The problem is that net income is not what you think it is. Those with a net income of $400,000 will receive a tax increase. Do we agree on that?
Now look at the definition of "net income".
“Net income†is the phrase commonly used to refer to a company’s “profit.†It represents how much money the company has left over, if any, after it’s paid the costs of doing business — payroll, raw materials, taxes, interest on loans, etc." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7477449/ns/business-answer_desk/t/whats-difference-between-revenue-income/
Therefore, your little business did not reach $400,000 or even $250,000 in net income.
New Ernst & Young Study on Top Rates
Posted by admin on July 17, 2012
The study points out that this policy would raise the top tax rate on S corporation and other flow-through income from 35 percent to nearly 45 percent. As a result, the marginal effective tax rate on new business investment would be more than 15 percent higher than it is today, discouraging businesses from investing in new plant and equipment and resulting, overtime, in fewer jobs and lower wages.
http://www.s-corp.org/2012/07/17/new-ernst-young-study-on-top-rates/
The problem is that net income is not what you think it is. Those with a net income of $400,000 will receive a tax increase. Do we agree on that?
Now look at the definition of "net income".
“Net income†is the phrase commonly used to refer to a company’s “profit.†It represents how much money the company has left over, if any, after it’s paid the costs of doing business — payroll, raw materials, taxes, interest on loans, etc." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7477449/ns/business-answer_desk/t/whats-difference-between-revenue-income/
Therefore, your little business did not reach $400,000 or even $250,000 in net income. If you type how much you paid your employees I will teach you how to figure out what your net income was.
Well, seeing that he's quoting the propaganda arm of the democrat party (msnbc). I doubt he can discuss anything beyond the talking points he's given.
The problem is that net income is not what you think it is. Those with a net income of $400,000 will receive a tax increase. Do we agree on that?
Now look at the definition of "net income".
“Net income†is the phrase commonly used to refer to a company’s “profit.†It represents how much money the company has left over, if any, after it’s paid the costs of doing business — payroll, raw materials, taxes, interest on loans, etc." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7477449/ns/business-answer_desk/t/whats-difference-between-revenue-income/
Therefore, your little business did not reach $400,000 or even $250,000 in net income. If you type how much you paid your employees I will teach you how to figure out what your net income was.
Are you saying that net income is not what the definition in the MSNBC link says it is? What is your definition of net income?
Are you saying that net income is not what the definition in the MSNBC link says it is? What is your definition of net income?
Have you ever done the bookkeeping or accounting for a small business? Do you know how to read a balance sheet?Yep. Thats Baby Shampoo to a T. Clueless.
I have. I've spent my working life doing just that. I can tell you first hand that the net income that the owner pays taxes on doesn't mean squat. It doesn't mean left-over, and it doesn't mean that the owner even took a paycheck for himself. Sure, you can have a left-over of XX dollars showing in the companies checking account, but that money has already been earmarked for next month's rent, next week's payroll and payments against the accounts payables coming due.
I'm so sick of all this class warfare crap on the job producers. Most people are clueless how it all works.
"Net income" is not the same as "profit". BS for you.
Have you ever done the bookkeeping or accounting for a small business? Do you know how to read a balance sheet?
I have. I've spent my working life doing just that. I can tell you first hand that the net income that the owner pays taxes on doesn't mean squat. It doesn't mean left-over, and it doesn't mean that the owner even took a paycheck for himself. Sure, you can have a left-over of XX dollars showing in the companies checking account, but that money has already been earmarked for next month's rent, next week's payroll and payments against the accounts payables coming due.
I'm so sick of all this class warfare crap on the job producers. Most people are clueless how it all works.
Dori, you are rambling.
Hey, asshole. Why are you running two users here? You and "SmilinJack" are the same person.
*****.
Dori, you are rambling. We were talking about yearly net income and you somehow pretend that the money reserved for "next month's rent" has anything to do with yearly net income.
Point #2: No money used for rent in any month is included as net income, so your "point" was irrelevant. Reading a bookkeeping book is not important if you don't know what it's being discussed in this thread. Focus.
3) It is unclear that you ever read a bookkeeping book.
Net income is a distinct accounting concept from profit. Profit is a term that "means different things to different people"[3], and different line items in a financial statement may carry the term "profit", such as gross profit and profit before tax.[1] In contrast, net income is a precisely defined term in accounting.[3]
I am not that user, and please do not be mad because you didn't know profits and net income were the same thing.
Bullshit. Put on your big boy pants and admit it. The three words "you are rambling" in two posts withing 10 minutes gave you away.
I am not that user, and please do not be mad because you didn't know profits and net income were the same thing.
Are you saying that net income is not what the definition in the MSNBC link says it is? What is your definition of net income?
Amazing how people do not understand how Internet addresses, providers, and servers work! :rofl:
Profits and net income are NOT the same thing: See:
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/difference-between-net-income-net-profit-after-tax-20663.html (http://smallbusiness.chron.com/difference-between-net-income-net-profit-after-tax-20663.html)
One wonders what a troll will accept as a fact.........or not...... :lmao:
.
Net income and profit are different. Profit is net income minus operating cost.
That was a made-up definition, which explains why you cited no source. Both profit AND net income are revenue minus operation costs.
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/netincome.asp#axzz2GokwKj9x
Can you stop inventing definitions in your mind?
How about addressing some of the sources that were already cited, rather than target what Ptarmigan has said? Going after low-hanging fruit, perhaps?
What Is the Difference Between Net Income & Net Profit After Tax?
by Christine Aldridge, Demand Media
As a manager or an investor, it is important that you understand what net income, or net profit, is and where to find this information. You should also understand what effects taxes have on a company's profits. To do such, you can examine the net income before taxes and the net profit after taxes.
The budget deal passed by the U.S. Senate today would raise taxes on 77.1 percent of U.S. households, mostly because of the expiration of a payroll tax cut, according to preliminary estimates from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington.
More than 80 percent of households with incomes between $50,000 and $200,000 would pay higher taxes. Among the households facing higher taxes, the average increase would be $1,635, the policy center said.
Dori, you are rambling. We were talking about yearly net income and you somehow pretend that the money reserved for "next month's rent" has anything to do with yearly net income.
Point #2: No money used for rent in any month is included as net income, so your "point" was irrelevant. Reading a bookkeeping book is not important if you don't know what it's being discussed in this thread. Focus.
3) It is unclear that you ever read a bookkeeping book.
So tell me then, little troll--what exactly do YOU do for a living?
So tell me then, little troll--what exactly do YOU do for a living?
House Speaker John A. Boehner (Ohio) and most other top GOP leaders took no public position on the measure and offered no public comment before the 10:45 p.m. vote. Boehner declined even to deliver his usual closing argument, leaving House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-Mich.) to defend the measure as the “largest tax cut in American history.â€
The bill will indeed shield millions of middle-class taxpayers from tax increases set to take effect this month. But it also will let rates rise on wages and investment profits for households pulling in more than $450,000 a year, marking the first time in more than two decades that a broad tax increase has been approved with GOP support.
The measure, which dealt with the tax question while punting sequestration cuts and the debt ceiling, passed with the support of 85 Republicans, including the Speaker who took the unusual measure of casting a vote, and 172 Democrats. Here’s the roll call, with the notable Yes vote of Rep. Paul Ryan and the notable No votes of incoming Sen. Tim Scott and Rep. Eric Cantor. Ryan’s vote will, of course, set up a 2016 primary debate on it that some conservatives believe he’ll never overcome. Color me skeptical that three years from now he won’t be able to defend it well enough to get through the process. Ahem, McCain and Romney.
Earlier in the day, the GOP caucus had entertained the idea of amending the Senate bill, which the Senate claimed it would not touch, thus ending this toxic game of ping-pong with a trip over the cliff as the markets opened today. By the time the GOP caucus met for the second time Tuesday, at 5:15 p.m., the tone in the room was reportedly vastly different than it had been earlier in the day. The Speaker offered to bring the bill to the floor for spending-cut amendments if 218 Republicans were in favor of it, but even conservative votes were backing off late Tuesday:
Jonathan Strong@j_strong
if even the right wingers aren't on board, then the amendment path fails. Fleming, Labrador, others say they are against it.
Yes, apparently, but I will try one more time, since teachers tend to be persistent!
See:
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/difference-between-net-income-net-profit-after-tax-20663.html (http://smallbusiness.chron.com/difference-between-net-income-net-profit-after-tax-20663.html)
And apparently over 3/4 of America qualifies as "wealthy" or perhaps even as "millionaires" with our NewSpeak DoubleThink Government:
See:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-01/senate-passed-deal-means-higher-tax-on-77-of-households.html (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-01/senate-passed-deal-means-higher-tax-on-77-of-households.html)
and once again, you do not say whether net income is calculated before or after payroll is paid to employees.
The dodging continues.
and once again, you do not say whether net income is calculated before or after payroll is paid to employees. The dodging continues.
Net income appears on the company’s statement of income. It is the amount that remains after adding together all revenues and subtracting all expenses, including cost of goods sold and income taxeshttp://smallbusiness.chron.com/difference-between-net-income-net-profit-after-tax-20663.html
The gross earnings of all employees paid during the calendar year (cash basis). It includes all forms of compensation, such as salaries, wages, commissions, dismissal pay, bonuses, vacation and sick leave pay, and compensation in kind, prior to such deductions as employees' social security contributions, withholding taxes, group insurance, union dues, and savings bonds. The total includes salaries of officers of corporations; it excludes payments to proprietors or partners of unincorporated concerns. The Census definition of payroll is identical to that recommended to all Federal statistical agencies by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, in particular, the definition used on the Employer's Quarterly Federal Tax Return, Treasury Form 941. This definition does not include employers' social security contributions or other nonpayroll labor costs, such as employees' pension plans, group insurance premiums, and workers' compensation.http://www.census.gov/econ/bes/definitions.html
Net profit after taxes is the net income of the organization less all taxes. It is the sum of all revenues less all expenses, including cost of goods sold and all taxes. While it is almost the same as net income, this terminology frequently appears on the company’s financial statements in order to differentiate between profits before and after subtracting taxes.http://smallbusiness.chron.com/difference-between-net-income-net-profit-after-tax-20663.html
and once again, you do not say whether net income is calculated before or after payroll is paid to employees. The dodging continues.
Now that smilinjack/shitstain has imploded, maybe we can go on to other things.
Like the thread, for example.
I did a quick scan, mods, and didn't see anything that chronicled what Boehner and his boys did last night. This is a pretty good analysis:
Final vote: 257-177, yea
Rest is at the link. (http://hotair.com/archives/2013/01/02/house-passes-fiscal-cliff-deal/)
Dori, you are rambling. We were talking about yearly net income and you somehow pretend that the money reserved for "next month's rent" has anything to do with yearly net income.
smilinjack/shitstain did not implode. You are corresponding with it right now.
And yes, I have read lots of accounting and tax books and taken several college courses on the subject.
and once again, you do not say whether net income is calculated before or after payroll is paid to employees. The dodging continues.
It would appear that it is less a case of "dodging" and more a case of lack of will to read the material presented to you and/or a gross and willful ignorance on your part. Either way, Ausonius and the rest are right and you (as well as MSNBC) are wrong.
Many thanks to Wasp69 for taking the time to point out the salient portions of the articles!
Any time, sir.
Yeah, I noticed that as well. This guy appears to be at least a smidgeon intelligent, however, whereas the other clown - Jackmeoff or whatever he called himself - was noticeably stupid. And unkempt.
lol. Wasp feels good because the guy that was arguing with me thinks the other guy that was arguing with me (Wasp) posted a kick-ass website link. Shocker.
Wasp's snippet said net income was calculated after payroll, and this is somewhat a good thing for your argument?
In fact, I thank you, Wasp, for that wonderful link, as if vindicated the fact that payroll shouldn't even have brought up in this thread, as it is subtracted from the equation in order to find the net income.
Now look at the definition of "net income".
“Net income†is the phrase commonly used to refer to a company’s “profit.†It represents how much money the company has left over, if any, after it’s paid the costs of doing business — payroll, raw materials, taxes, interest on loans, etc." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/...e-between-revenue-income/
Net income and profit are exactly the same thing.
...profits and net income were the same thing.
Both profit AND net income are revenue minus operation costs.
Net profit after taxes is the net income of the organization less all taxes. It is the sum of all revenues less all expenses, including cost of goods sold and all taxes. While it is almost the same as net income, this terminology frequently appears on the company’s financial statements in order to differentiate between profits before and after subtracting taxes.http://smallbusiness.chron.com/difference-between-net-income-net-profit-after-tax-20663.html
Now continue to tell each other how wonderful your snippets are.
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-signs-fiscal-cliff-bill-autopen-055852354--abc-news-politics.html
The lazy,useless piece of shit scolds everyone else but can`t keep his worthless ass in Washington to even do his job. :banghead:
lol. Wasp feels good because the guy that was arguing with me thinks the other guy that was arguing with me (Wasp) posted a kick-ass website link. Shocker.
And again I ask--what exactly do you do for a living again?
Well, as you encouraged him to get the sand out of his vag, he clearly is a beach whore.
7. They guy is still campaigning for...an unsaid third term perhaps??? Time will tell. I am just so mad at this and very disappointed with my party for falling for Obama's tricks! I am also disappointed in the American people...
This was all a fiasco from the beginning. Rush said it clearly today:
1. They taxed Small Business Owners; not the 1%.
2. They orchestrated the whole thing to make it seem like a crisis when clearly they could have handled this thing in August, or last year even!
3. They didn't close loopholes and now Obama wants to go after that too!
4. Obama used the crisis to destroy and demean the Republicans even more.
5. The Republicans fell for Obama's plot to destroy and demean them and now they look like the bad guys
6. Raised Taxes and Spending Cuts would have happened even if we went off the cliff.
7. They guy is still campaigning for...an unsaid third term perhaps??? Time will tell. I am just so mad at this and very disappointed with my party for falling for Obama's tricks! I am also disappointed in the American people because they care more about which celebrity is hooking up with who and which celebrity is having a baby!
Finally: This Doesn't Solve a F***ing Thing!!!!!!! :mad:
We'll see if Boehner sticks with his plan. He won't talk with Obama? Is that even possible?
Boehner said he wouldn't negotiate with Obama one-on-one. I don't blame him, everythime Boehner thought he had a deal, Obummer would move the goal posts, change the rules and up the ante.
If truth be told, it's Obama who REFUSES to make deals with Republicans and stick to his word. He's a world class liar.
I don't know what, in the past 4 year, ever gave Boenher that idea that this wasn't the case. Why did he think this time would be different? He hould have told Obama to jump in a fricking lake!!
Boehner said he wouldn't negotiate with Obama one-on-one. I don't blame him, everythime Boehner thought he had a deal, Obummer would move the goal posts, change the rules and up the ante.
And yes, that MAObama still seems to be campaigning has not been recognized by enough people: I understand he is still releasing "videos" of himself. Narcissism is difficult to give up, I suppose.
Why not? It worked for Hitler.
Having a higher percentage of tax rates in every level and type for American Taxpayer is a must for the country's economic use.